The PS2 journey brought about the mass acceptance of the media.Financially it may not, but its impact has been great.

The PS4 made the most profit and sold more games. It also made Sony king of the market again after their first generational loss. So I would say PS4. Selling more consoles isn't much use if they don't generate the number of games sold.

Everybody is saying that PS4 sold more games.

How many PS4-games were sold so far?

Okay, found the numbers myself:

PS2 is by far and away the more successful console in terms of marketshare and sheer dominance. That thing came out and laid waste to everything in its path. The only dedicated home console that had a larger market share was (I believe) the NES, and that's saying something.

But as far as profit, I'm sure the PS4 will end up making them more money because of the rise of digital and subscription (everything!).

I think it depends on what you define as success. In my opinion it is the PS2. The reasoning? PS2 is the first console to hit over 150M units and is, so far, the best selling console ever. This is at a time when it's contemporaries sold just over 20M units. Software was not nearly as cheap to make due to a lack of cheap digital software sales like indies, yet PS2 still managed to sell more than any other console (aside from the PS4 just recently). In addition to all of this, the PS2 did this at a time when selling over 100M consoles was not guaranteed (in fact, only two other consoles did this before it) and the gaming landscape was not NEARLY as popular as it is today. 

The PS4 is SUPER successful. However, I would attribute some of that success to it's major competitors shooting themselves in the foot. The Wii U started with a misstep due to it's lack of power yet high price tag and poor advertising, the Xbox One started with very controversial messaging that had to be reversed completel AND was sold at an even higher price tag than it's contemporary (PS4) for worse specs. The PS2 however? Mopped the floor with the Dreamcast to start, then when it's contemporaries showed up with better specs and even a cheaper price...still mopped the floor. It's really insane. PS2 sales just floor me every time. To be honest, it shouldn't have sold as well as it did. It was hard to program for (unlike the GC and Xbox) and didn't contain any popular innovative exclusive features (unlike the Wii or DS) yet it sold boatloads. Sony should be proud. PS4, to be honest, just followed a successful mold that was propelled even farther due to it's competition. 

I don’t know which one made Sony a bigger profit. That’s the one.

I think neither sales nor profits are the correct way to measure which console is the most sucessful. 

A console is not a business, a console is a product, so the tangent of "what is the purpose of a business" is pointless for this discussion 

The most sucessful product is the product that archieve the best all the things it was planned to archieve. For instance, if you release a product with nothing but to advertise your brand then the product that brings in the most engagement will win 

The purpose or PS2 was not only to destroy Nintendo's market share and complete Sega destruction, but to leave Sony brand to market where no other console have a strong footstep. The outcome was:

- Nintendo leaving the Red Console Market (high specs, focused on strong hardware and technical accomplishments) and dedicating themselves to make their own thing as much different as possible from Sony

- Sega exiting console market 

- PS2 selling more than any other console in story outside USA and Japan 

The only thing they failed to do was to stopping Microsoft to grown. In reality despite the sales OXBOX left its costumers happy enough to turn them into fans of the brand who were ready to buy their true breakthrough X360

So in all, PS2 manage to accomplish almost everything Sony intended them to do. I'd say PS2 was the most sucessful Sony console, but it wasn't the most sucessful Sony era. Why? Well, it's not like PS2 plan was perfect, Sony miscalculated two things: Third parties having no proper allegiance, the fact first party are important to solidify a hardware brand

I think during PS2 times it was common for 3rd parties to relese their games only on one platform, as such 3rd parties exclusives could drawn interest for consoles this lead to Sony neglecting their first party output as their main concern was to bring in as many 3rd party blockbusters arls possibles 

As the market changes drastically from 6th to 7th generation as well as very good business decisions from both MS and Nintendo Sony should have realized that maybe their strategy for PS2 wasn't exaclty the best way to manage a gaming business 

It leads them to PS4. With PS4 they wanted to strength their IPs and they absolutely made it. Sony is now in a position they can release a new IP and sells 5 million comfortably as if it was nothing, not even Nintendo can do that as they rely in good WOM to sell their new entries. 

Moreover, Sony plan with PS4 was to make people spend with software and goddamn it people are spending a LOT with software. The plethora of 3rd parties available combined with lower priced games after are mitigated buy the bunch of MTX and DLCs existing on Sony ecosystem. People on internet always rage about how evil MTX are but the market clear screams to be unbothered by MTX, alas the market in reality seems to LOVE them, last year add-on content made staggering 8.3 billion in profits against 6.2 billion from software sales and 3.2 billion from network/services. 

So Sony is now in a position where they have a very healthy and profitable subscription service, very good software sales as well as third party support and their IPs are stronger than ever. Sony might now have the market dominance they had in PS2 and PS2 might be a more successful product than PS4, but Sony as a gaming business seems in a healthier position compared to PS2 era as we can see by how well they are transitioning to PS5

Your view on the purpose of business is not uncommon, but it is most definitely incorrect.  

If your view were true, then most industries would not exist.  There are some industries, like finance or real estate, that consistently give a high return for a relatively low amount of risk.  Some industries are simply more profitable.  If the point were to make profits, then every business in a low profit sector, like food service, should close down and start a company in the finance industry instead.  In practice, this sort of thing is the exception rather than the rule.  Most businesses instead try to succeed in their chosen industry, regardless of whether it is one of the more profitable industries or not.

The Entertainment Industry (which includes the Game Industry) just happens to be one the worst industries to be in for any business that cares only about profits.  The risk for any business in the Entertainment Industry is incredibly high.  Even the companies that seem to be at the top of the Game Industry, like Sony and Nintendo, do not get financial results that are remotely consistent.  Sony's losses during the PS3 era were greater than their profits during the PS2 era, and Nintendo's fortunes can obviously change greatly from one console to the next. 

And these are the best companies.  All of the other companies have a harder time succeeding than either Sony or Nintendo, and there are many established companies that have gone out of business in the Game Industry.  If these companies were really in it solely for the profits, then they should have left the Game Industry long ago and started a business in a more profitable industry.  The truth is that Sony and Nintendo and every other company in the Game Industry are there by choice.  They are choosing to serve customers by making games.  It isn't about profits alone.

Steve Jobs didn't become a successful entrepreneur by being greedier than everyone else.  He was successful, because he had a vision of every person in the world using a computer.  He had a vision of how his business would serve people.  He chose to serve people by selling them home computers, laptops, smart phones, etc....  He definitely didn't think there was anything wrong with making profits.  (I don't either.)  However, profits are not the end, not the real purpose of a business.  The profits are the means to an end.  The end is to create new customers and to keep them by serving them with the business's goods and services.

I think you're reading something into my comments that I didn't say. Who said anything about being greedy? I also didn't talk about profit adter my first comment, because that term may be confusing.  I said maximizing total return to owners.  Generally, chasing a quick buck is not the right way to do that, though it may be the best way to show profit in the short term.

My view is most definitely correct. There's not even any real debate about it, apparently outside of this website.  I most definitely know about business. I own 100% of a business now, owned another in the past.  Grew up in a family that owned and operated a business. I invest in other businesses, such that I own a piece of many. I studied business and have a business degree. It is what I do, and what I have always done.  If you disagree, you are disagreeing with essentially all business people.  There just is no question that businesses exist to maximize return to owners.  I don't thank you disagree though. I think you're just not understanding the subject matter very well.

In fact, in most countries, management of a public company has a legal responsibility to do just that. So if they tried to do something else, they would be liable, in some cases criminally liable, for not meeting their most basic fiduciary duty.  Now, most companies are not public. But, they still have to attract investment, and they still have to generate a return to continue existing.  They do those things only by trying to maximize return to investors/owners.  

Considering that software number for the DS is false this is not reliable. Also afaik the PS4 sold over 1.5 billion software units.